KILARC RESERVOIR: Fishermen hope to keep site; Meeting is set on PG&E plan to end Kilarc Reservoir project

It's the classic Western tale of hydropower versus fish, but with a twist. For the sake of a popular trout fishing hole near Whitmore, locals are clamoring for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to keep Kilarc Reservoir in place. "It's sort of a local treasure that no one wants to see lost," said Maggie Trevelyan, who lives near the 41/2-acre reservoir.

But PG&E has marked the Kilarc hydropower project for decommission, meaning the dam on Old Cow Creek, powerhouse and reservoir could come out. The century-old project's license with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission expires today and PG&E now begins the federal process of closing down the power operation. That starts with a public meeting at 7 p.m. today at the Whitmore Elementary School.

PG&E officials will explain the decommissioning process and field questions from the public, said PG&E spokeswoman Lisa Randle. A plan detailing how and when the project would be shut down is due in March 2009, she said. After reviewing the 3.2-megawatt Kilarc powerhouse with stakeholders, as well as federal and state resource agencies, PG&E announced in March 2005 that it wasn't an economic source of power.

The company said the planned decommissioning of Kilarc, as well as the nearby 1.8-megawatt Cow Creek powerhouse on South Cow Creek, also would provide more habitat for federally protected spring run chinook salmon and steelhead trout in the creeks.

The two stonework powerhouses, which were built in the early 1900s, provide enough power to supply 3,750 homes. Synergics Energy Services of Annapolis, Md., had considered buying the facilities, but the deal fell through, Randle said.

A member of the Friends of Cow Creek, Trevelyan said she and others who want to save the reservoir will be at tonight's meeting. The reservoir is a "high recreation area," said Glenn Dye, a member of the Friends of Cow Creek. He said it is used not just for fishing, but also for picnicking and hiking.

With its five-catch-a-day limit and rules that allow for everything from bait to spinners to be tied on anglers' lines, the reservoir is most known for its fish, said Mike Berry, environmental scientist at the California Department of Fish and Game in Redding. "It's a real popular fishery," he said. "It's a good place to take kids to learn how to fish."

DFG stocks the reservoir with 9,000 rainbow trout each year, said Pat Overton, a senior hatchery supervisor at DFG's Redding office. If the reservoir is removed, those fish would be put somewhere else, he said. "Don't know where they'd go" though, he said. #

SACRAMENTO — Firing the latest salvo in a battle over the future of the Klamath River, the California Energy Commission on Monday reaffirmed its stand that removing four hydroelectric dams that block salmon migration would cost less than trying to keep them.

In December, the commission issued a report asserting that removing the dams and purchasing replacement power would cost roughly $100 million less than installing extensive new fish ladders for imperiled salmon and steelhead.

PacifiCorp, the Portland-based company that owns the dams, volleyed back with a 50-page study of its own suggesting that the commission study, performed by a private consulting firm, got it wrong.

The power company argued that the commission failed to consider several important economic and environmental factors and that renovating the dams to accommodate the fish would actually save $46 million more than dismantling them. The firm submitted its study to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which is considering whether the dams will win a new long-term operating license.

In recent weeks, the state Energy Commission's consultant ran the numbers anew, taking in numbers PacifiCorp said it ignored. The results were far different from PacifiCorp's.

The commission's latest report said that dam removal would be even more cost-effective than its consultant originally determined — about $114 million less than relicensing the dams and installing the fish ladders.

California Energy Commissioner John Geesman said in a statement that the new analysis, which used PacifiCorp's numbers, "clearly indicates" that the utility's electrical customers would save money with dam removal.

PacifiCorp's four dams produce enough power for thousands of homes in the Northwest but have blocked 300 miles of upriver habitat for salmon and steelhead. Federal wildlife agencies have ordered that the dams be retrofitted with fish ladders, but PacifiCorp argues that the dams are too tall for ladders to work. The company proposed using trucks to haul fish around the dams.

Commission officials said their economic model provided all sides with a "good-faith analysis of the pros and cons" of the various options for the dams. The model is available online at http://www.energy.ca.gov/klamath . #

In California, it seems that most of the news we get about salmon and steelhead populations gets progressively worse each year as the fish collide with habitat loss from development, water exports and the state's exploding population.

However, there are a few bright spots on the horizon like the restoration work the Department of Fish and Game has planned for Tehama County's Battle Creek.

Battle Creek is one of the most important salmon and steelhead spawning tributaries on the Sacramento River and is home to endangered and threatened populations of steelhead and Chinook salmon - including federally listed winter and spring run kings.

Historically, the creek was the only Sacramento River tributary downstream of the Pit River capable of supporting all four runs of Chinook salmon and steelhead. In the early 1900s, miners built numerous diversion dams across the creek to provide hydroelectric power to Iron Mountain Mine near Keswick.

The dams blocked migrating salmon and steelhead from accessing their spawning habitat and reduced water quality in Battle Creek to the point where these fish and resident trout could barely exist.

For nearly 100 years, Battle Creek salmonids have been hanging by a thread. That should all change soon because the DFG recently announced a $67 million project to restore the stream to, hopefully, some of its former glory.

"The fact that salmon and steelhead may soon be thriving in an additional 42 miles of Battle Creek is a story of partnerships," DFG director Ryan Broddrick said. "Wide support and cooperative efforts between state and federal agencies, the Pacific Gas and Electric Co., environmental groups, local community groups, and sport and commercial fishing organizations are the reason the Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project has become a reality."

The project, funded by the California Bay Delta Authority, will remove several hydroelectric diversion dams along Battle Creek, as well as increase water flow while protecting fish and creating passages.

Battle Creek is a particularly good option for restoration work because of its unique features. It has a relatively high and stable flow of water throughout the year - unusual in California - making it a uniquely drought-resistant habitat for salmon and steelhead.

Instead of seasonal rains rapidly flowing out of the watershed, large portions of annual rainfall percolates through the underlying volcanic rock and then emerge as cold springs. Snow melting from Mount Lassen provides cool surface water throughout much of the spring and early summer. The cold, clean water are exactly what salmon and steelhead need to thrive.

Making this whole deal even more intriguing is the fact that the project is sure to boost populations of the native wild rainbow trout throughout a large portion of Battle Creek. DFG fishery biologists expect the trout population in these areas will increase to between 5,000 and 7,000 trout per mile due to restoration habitat changes.

For more information about the project, visit the Bureau of Reclamation Web site, www.usbr.gov/mp/battlecreek or the Battle Creek Conservancy Web site, www.battle-creek.net. #

SB 917 would create 10 regional Cooperative Conservation Partnerships to oversee local and regional project planning and establish a Watershed Conservation Protection Program to ensure funding is available. Watershed conservation protects the ecosystems of mountains, hills and forests that naturally gather and drain water from the environment into aquifers, and it has proven critical for flood control, habitat protection, and providing pure drinking water.

“Cooperative conservation partnerships are essential to meet statewide objectives for clean water and beaches, to protect native species, and to improve flood management,” said Migden (D-San Francisco/North Bay). “While such partnerships have proven effective, they continue to lack permanent funding—which my legislation aims to fix.”

Migden added that the legislation will help to foster collaboration between diverse community interests because local partnerships will include farmers and ranchers, conservationists, business owners, minority communities, and public agencies. Typical projects would protect water quality and local water supplies, protect open land and productive agricultural lands, minimize flood damage, encourage sound land management practices, restore fish and wildlife populations, reduce litter in waterways and develop community parks.

For several decades the state has relied largely on periodic bonds to finance resource management and restoration. SB 917 creates the California Watershed Conservation Protection Fund in the state treasury to create a permanent funding stream for watershed restoration projects and cooperative conservation partnerships. Funding would be generated through fees paid by water-bottling companies that currently pay no more than $125 per year for water procured from California’s lakes, rivers and watersheds.

“The bottled water industry depends on healthy watersheds for the purity of its product. This bill will provide resources for locally based partnerships to undertake activities that ensure high water quality for all,” said Mary Lee Knecht, President of the California Watershed Network.

More than 300 California cooperative conservation partnerships currently conduct erosion control, fish and wildlife enhancement, and water-quality improvement projects.

SB 917 is sponsored by the California Watershed Coalition and the Green California Coalition.

CONTACT: Tracy Fairchild
(916) 651-4003#

Federal scientists added north state water bodies to a state list of those that don't meet quality standards because of problems that include mercury in Trinity Lake and the Sacramento River below Red Bluff, and sediment in the Klamath River.

Developed by workers in Water Resources Control Board offices around the state, then reviewed, revised and approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the list helps state water scientists plan their workload.

"This is a very useful list in terms of determining where priorities are," said William L. Rukeyser, control board spokesman.

The list of about 700 troubled waters -- which includes bays, estuaries and parts of the ocean, as well as streams, rivers and lakes -- is updated every two to three years, he said.

Around the north state, the water cleanup projects that take priority often are caused by metals getting into water from old mining sites, said Ken Landau, assistant executive officer at the control board's Rancho Cordova office.

For example, old mines are blamed for Lake Shasta's high cadmium, copper and zinc levels near where West Squaw Creek flows into the lake.

Warmer water, caused by tree removal and other changes near bodies of water, are another common problem in the north state, Landau added. In tackling the problems, the control board usually looks to minimize human effects on the environment.

While some problems can be fixed, others can only be monitored, he said. "Some of them you can clean up, some of them you can't completely," he said.

Though it wasn't a problem in the north state, new to the list of water quality problems this year were exotic species, which can invade a body of water and throw its natural ecosystem out of balance, Rukeyser said.

For the next month, the EPA will be taking public comments on the list. To read the list online, go to www.epa.gov/region09 and click on Calif. TDML 303d updates.#

YubaNet.com

The Department of Fish and Game (DFG) today announced $67 million in funding to re-establish endangered and threatened Chinook salmon and steelhead in northern California. Battle Creek, a tributary of the Sacramento River near Manton in Tehama County, becomes the largest single restoration effort funded by DFG, with construction beginning as early as fall 2007.

"The fact that salmon and steelhead may soon be thriving in an additional 42 miles of Battle Creek is a story of partnerships," DFG Director Ryan Broddrick said. "Wide support and cooperative efforts between state and federal agencies, the Pacific Gas and Electric Co., environmental groups, local community groups, and sport and commercial fishing organizations are the reason the Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project has become a reality."

The project will remove several hydroelectric diversion dams in Battle Creek, as well as increase water flow while protecting fish and creating passages. The restoration project, funded by the California Bay Delta Authority, will allow for maximum anadromous fish habitat restoration to support the Central Valley Project Improvement Act.

Battle Creek offers the geologic and hydrologic conditions to support state- and federally-listed spring- and winter-run Chinook salmon and steelhead. Restoration of habitat in Battle Creek will allow for improvement of these fish populations, which will enhance the consistency in state and federal water project operations and the salmon harvest.

"We are proud to have worked with the communities around Battle Creek to help make this historic project possible," said Steve Thompson, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service California and Nevada Manager. "We are fully committed to this partnership effort to return winter-run and spring-run Chinook salmon and steelhead to the Battle Creek watershed."

Anadromous fish hatch in freshwater, spend up to two years in their natural stream and then swim to the ocean for one to five years before coming back to the freshwater stream to spawn.

Battle Creek has a relatively high and stable flow of water throughout the year, something unusual in California, making it a uniquely drought-resistant habitat for salmon and steelhead. Instead of seasonal rains rapidly flowing out of the watershed, large portions of annual rainfall percolates through the underlying volcanic rock and then emerges as cold springs. Snow melting from Mount Lassen provides cool surface water throughout much of the spring and early summer. This relatively stable base flow and cold water temperature offers an unparalleled restoration opportunity.

"The restoration of this magnificent habitat after nearly 100 years of blockage and human manipulation provides an incredible opportunity to recover three new independent populations of threatened and endangered Chinook salmon and steelhead in a stream where previously, these fish were only barely hanging on," said Michael Tucker, a fisheries biologist with the National Marine Fisheries Service. "The restoration of these Battle Creek populations to self-sustaining levels is considered an extremely important step toward the final recovery of these species. With the commitment of final funding for this project, today is a day for all to celebrate the eminent return of these fish to their native home in Battle Creek."

"Battle Creek is currently the biggest watershed restoration and dam removal project in the state and demonstrates the commitment of California residents to conserving our state's precious natural resources," said Dawit Zeleke, Regional Director for The Nature Conservancy's California program. "The Nature Conservancy is proud to contribute research and funding, through a generous grant from The David & Lucile Packard Foundation, to bring salmon and steelhead back to this once wild and beautiful river."

Historically, Battle Creek was the only Sacramento River tributary downstream of the Pit River capable of supporting all four runs of Chinook salmon and steelhead. In the early 1900s, miners built numerous diversion dams across the creek to provide hydroelectric power to Iron Mountain Mine near Keswick. The dams blocked migrating salmon and steelhead from accessing their spawning habitat and reduced water quality in Battle Creek to the point where these fish and resident trout could barely exist.

The Pacific Gas and Electric Co. later acquired the project as part of its vast hydroelectric operations to provide power for its customers. In 1999, the company voluntarily joined forces with four public agencies to pursue one of the largest and most significant ecological restoration efforts in California. The collaborative effort resulted in the landmark restoration plan that includes the removal of five diversion dams, construction of screens and ladders on three dams on Battle Creek, and increased stream flows.

"Pacific Gas and Electric Co. is proud to continue its tradition of responsible environmental stewardship," said Randy Livingston, PG&E's Senior Director of Power Generation. "This agreement is an example of private industry, public stakeholders, public agencies and a wide variety of others working together to restore the fishery while maintaining a renewable energy source. With the release of funding we are excited about this project and its contribution to the many fishery restoration efforts now underway in California."

Benefits of the restoration project are not confined to just salmon and steelhead. The project will boost populations of the native wild rainbow trout throughout a large portion of Battle Creek. DFG fishery biologists expect the trout population in these areas will increase to between 5,000 and 7,000 trout per mile due to restoration habitat changes.

"This project exemplifies the importance of diverse groups coming together to support common goals," said Kirk Rodgers, the Bureau of Reclamation's Mid-Pacific Regional Director. "Projects like this help restore fish populations and improve state and federal water operations' reliability."

After decades of debate and planning, diversion dams on Battle Creek will be removed to make it easier for wild and protected salmon and steelhead to spawn upstream.

The California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) announced Thursday that it had secured $67 million from state and federal agencies to cover the cost of demolishing five small dams along the tributary to the Sacramento River between Manton and the Coleman National Fish Hatchery near Anderson.

"This is really the culmination of 20 years of work," said Mike Berry, staff environmental scientist at DFG's Redding office.

Work crews could start using jackhammers and excavators to tear down the 12- to 15-foot concrete or stonework dams as early as fall, with the project expected to take two to three years to complete, he said. Fish ladders will be added to three dams left on Battle Creek's two main forks and more water will be released downstream in dryer months.

In all, the subtraction of the dams and the addition of the ladders should open up 42 miles of spawning and rearing habitat to wild salmon and steelhead, Berry said. Removing the diversions will increase flows down the creek by more than 10 times in dryer months.

Using a dam that can close off Battle Creek at the fish hatchery, Berry said federal fish managers plan to only let endangered winter-run chinook salmon, threatened spring-run chinook and threatened steelhead use the reopened waterway.

Along with the thousands of salmon and steelhead expected to go up Battle Creek, he said there could be as many as 5,000 to 7,000 rainbow trout per mile.

"So the trout population is expected to go through the roof," Berry said.

Built in the early 1900s, the dams divert water cascading down Battle Creek from springs near Lassen Peak to powerhouses, where it's used to turn generators and create electricity. A trio of small powerhouses produces 28 megawatts, or enough for 21,000 homes, said Lisa Randle, spokeswoman for Pacific Gas and Electric Co.

PG&E owns the dams and the powerhouses. With the coming changes, power production will be cut by 30 percent, down to about 20 megawatts, or enough for about 15,000 homes.

Randle said the power project on Battle Creek is one of the smallest owned by the company -- which provides gas, electricity or both utilities to 15 million customers from Eureka to Bakersfield -- and it will replace the lost power production with other sources.

"As a company, we do think it is the right thing to do," Randle said.

But critics say it's not enough of the right thing.

"We really think the most effective way to do this is to take out all eight of the dams," said Zeke Grader, executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations.

He said some of the best habitat on the creek and its tributaries is above the dams being left in place and that it would be better to take them out than to put ladders on them.

While the effort to remove dams on Battle Creek started out well, in the past decade it got bogged down by agencies joining in the discussions as costs skyrocketed as the talks dragged on, Grader said.

Reaction to the changes to Battle Creek was mixed among fishing guides whose customers go after fall-run chinook salmon on the Sacramento River bred at the Coleman Fish Hatchery.

Kirk Portocarrero, owner of Outdoor Adventures Sport Fishing in Redding, said any news about improvements to salmon-spawning grounds, protected or not, is good news.

"If it improves the fishery, we are really happy to see it happen," he said.

But fellow guide Mike Bogue, owner of Mike Bogue's Guide Service, said the project won't really improve much because fall-run chinook will still be blocked from going up Battle Creek.

"It's an awful lot of money for nothing," he said. #

Federal energy law pre-empts regional water quality officials' regulation of blue-green algae in the Klamath River's reservoirs, officials said Thursday in denying requests by the Karuk Tribe and fishing and environmental groups for strict limits on Pacificorp's hydropower operations.

The North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board agreed with its counsel that the Federal Power Act trumps its authority, and that the restriction on the production of toxic algae would have to come through state certification of the federal license Pacificorp is seeking.

In that process, Board Executive Officer Catherine Kuhlman said, state regulators are bound to follow existing parameters in the North Coast Basin Plan.

The Karuk Tribe, the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations and Klamath Riverkeeper asked the board to impose waste discharge requirements on Pacificorp's project. Michael Lozeau, an attorney for the tribe, argued that the state and federal processes don't address the need to take action on the algae problem now.

”The operation itself is producing the problem,” Lozeau said. “It's not flowing in from somewhere else.”

He said that the federal Clean Water Act preserves the state's right to veto any hydropower license, and gives it the authority to take interim measures to deal with the algae problem.

The blue-green algae is prolific in Pacificorp's reservoirs, and can produce a liver toxin that the World Health Organization identifies as a moderate risk -- even in concentrations thousands of times less than water quality sampling has shown in some summer months in recent years.

Pacificorp attorney Robert Donlan said that the state's role is through the license certification process. He also claimed that characterizing the reservoirs as in violation of state law is premature, although he admitted that the project stretch is impaired.

The company also argued that the petition goes too far in claiming the algae is “waste” produced by the project, which triggers state water quality restrictions.

”I think it's fair to say that there are impairments,” Donlan said, “but they're being worked on.”

The State Water Resources Control Board is working on a certification for the 30- to 50-year license renewal the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is considering issuing to Pacificorp.

Others characterized the algae problem as becoming steadily worse. Biologist Pat Higgins described the reservoirs as “engines of nutrient pollution,” and said California should develop guidelines like Oregon's which shut reservoirs to recreational use when they contain such high levels of the toxic algae.

Ron Reed, a biologist and Karuk ceremonial leader, said diarrhea and rashes at camps during summer ceremonies in which participants spent days in the water are common. He implored the board to take immediate action.

”We are not a Third World community,” Reed said, “so we shouldn't be treated like one.”

Prior to rejecting the petition, board member Heidi Harris told the group that laws aren't written with feelings, although she sympathized -- as a Trinity River resident -- with not being able to use the river at times.

”Remember we can only do what we can do,” Harris said.

The board voted unanimously to direct its staff to come to its April meeting with recommendations for clarifying existing basin plan standards for algae, which will be provided to the State Water Resources Control Board as it drafts its water quality certification for the hydropower project. #

Tests run on murky water pulled from French Gulch Creek late last month show no evidence of mining chemicals, according to an independent laboratory in Rancho Cordova.

"Nothing was found in the water samples," said Jim Pedri, assistant executive officer for the state's Regional Water Quality Control Board.

The control board is still waiting for test results from California Laboratory Services for other samples taken in recent weeks along the creek near the French Gulch gold mine. Neighbors who live along the creek and below where it flows into Clear Creek have expressed concern that the mine could be clouding the water with chemicals and sediment.

"I've never complained before because I've never had visible problems before," said Carolyn Ritter, who has lived along Clear Creek for more than 30 years.

As heavy rain fell Feb. 21 and the creek turned a milky gray, Bianca Bennett called 911 and asked for a hazardous materials team to sample the creek that flows next to her property on French Gulch Road.

After taking the sample, the team passed it onto the control board and it was sent to the Rancho Cordova lab along with other samples taken near the mine by a control board scientist.

The test results the control board returned are for five water samples taken the day Bennett called 911 by Philip Woodward, a senior engineering geologist for the board. Bennett was unavailable for comment Tuesday.

Tuesday, Peter Kuhn, president of Reno-based Bullion River Gold Mining Corp., which owns the mine, said he hadn't heard the test results yet. He said the mine has been producing gold.

"Everything is running and everything is going quite well," he said.

Woodward said the test results combined with his inspection of the mine -- also Feb. 21 -- lead him to think that wastewater and sediment aren't escaping from the mine.

He said heavy rains have caused cloudiness in the creek in recent months.

In an effort to find what that is, Woodward and other scientists will fly the watershed in a helicopter Thursday.

While they didn't find any chemicals used in mining, the tests did show that water in Scorpion Gulch and French Gulch Creek -- as well as run off from the road -- had high levels of the poisonous metal arsenic.

The arsenic levels are more than four times the amount considered safe for drinking water, Pedri said.

But the arsenic isn't a result of the mining, he said.

Ritter doesn't agree. She said the arsenic is in the water as a direct result of more than a century of mining in the hills around French Gulch. "It's under the ground and the only reason it's on the surface now is the mining brings it out," Ritter said. #

Redding Record-Searchlight – 3/9/07
By Dylan Darling, staff writer

A new round of legislation aimed at designating 17,000 acres of public land along the Sacramento River near Red Bluff as a national recreation area is making its way through the U.S. Congress.

U.S. Sens. Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, both California Democrats, on Thursday introduced the Sacramento River Bend National Recreation Area Act. Their act comes on the heels of a similar bill introduced last week in the House by Rep. Wally Herger, a Republican whose district includes much of the north state.

The three lawmakers proposed similar bills during Congress' last session, but they didn't make it into law before the session ended.

"The time just ran out and it had to be reintroduced for this Congress," said Steve Anderson, field manager for the U.S. Bureau of Land Management's Redding office.

The BLM manages the land that would become a national recreation area and has been acquiring acreage there in a long series of land exchanges for the past 30 years. The land includes 15 miles of river frontage and is along a winding, mostly untouched stretch of the Sacramento River from Battle Creek almost to Red Bluff. It's called Sacramento River Bend because of a big bend in the river that is its defining characteristic.

Most of the land is in Tehama County. Both Shasta and Tehama counties' boards of supervisors have given their support to the designation.

"This is quintessential California landscape," Boxer said. "By designating this special place as a national recreation area, Californians and all Americans will be able to share in the splendor of the area and the recreational opportunities it provides."

If the land does become a national recreational area, it would be only the second in the country managed by the BLM, said Bob Warren, general manager of the Shasta-Cascade Wonderland Association, a regional tourism group in the north state. The other one is in Alaska.

With the designation would come federal funds for operation and recognition on a national level that would draw in more visitors, he said. "Having the designation is pretty important," Warren said.

But those who use the land now worry that the change could bring more restrictions, said Michael Payne, president of the Shasta County Sportsmen's Association. Association members often hunt on the land proposed for designation. He said the land is used not just by hunters, but also by bikers, horseback riders and hikers -- all of whom long have been able to get along and enjoy their diverse activities. "If it stays that way it'd be great," he said. #

People interested in water might find that now's a time to learn a little something about grant writing. With two new bonds passed by voters, billions of dollars will be coming down the pipeline for various aspects of the state's water supply.

Proposition 84, earmarks $5.4 billion for water quality and natural resource protection bond. Proposition 1E has $4.1 billion for disaster preparedness and flood prevention. The flood control aspects of the bonds were reviewed Monday during a three-hour meeting at the Chico Council Chambers.

The 11-person team from the Department of Water Resources took turns giving PowerPoint presentations about how the various funds will be distributed. The meeting was recorded to be placed on a new "FloodSafe California Web site: www.floodsafe.water.ca.gov.

George Qualley, chief of federal flood control system modification, said that the amount of money being talked about seems like a mountain, but it is likely only about a third of what the state needs.

After Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans and other cities, there has been a renewed awareness that California's intricate system of rivers, levees, dams and other waterways are in a precarious situation. Without a lot of effort, a breakdown of California's water system could put a halt to the state's economy.

Qualley echoed much of the talk going on in the capitol right now about the need for regional planning to solve water problems, including flood control.

Of the billions being discussed, there are five main areas of focus for flood control for fiscal year 2007-2008.
- Design and construction for urgent repairs — $419.8 million between the two bonds
- Reimbursement of local and federal flood control projects outside the Central Valley — $100 million
- Grants for storm water flood management — $102 million
- Non-structural flood control and floodplain projects — $52 million
- Development of regional and statewide flood plans — $26 million.

Right now state water leaders are still collecting data and input from the public, but things are moving rather quickly. Local governments will be expected to come up with a share of costs when new projects are put into place. The percentages will vary depending on the rules of the bond administration.

Levee reinforcement is a big issue, with 14,000 miles of levees in the state, explained Rod Mayer, chief of the division of flood management for the state.

"We need sustainable and robust projects," Mayer said. Because California passed the bonds, the state will soon be outspending what the federal government has historically spent. Mayer said the Corps of Engineers typically spends about $100 million per year for California flood control. With the California-generated funding, state and local partnerships will be vital, Mayer said. Qualley said that every taxpayer ends up paying when levees fail, not just those who are immediately effected by soggy soil. As was seen with Hurricane Katrina, deep flooding can be a catastrophe. "We need a higher level of protection," Qualley said.

Risks are increasing with climate change, such as more flood risk and less snowpack to store water as snow for use when the weather warms. Ocean levels are also having an effect on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, which has been near failing for decades. Qualley said right now the first task is to do levee evaluations and to gear everyone up to start working together. There will also need to be coordination with private landowners as there are thousands of miles of levees that are privately owned.

Presenters also shared lists of projects that have already been identified, most not in the Northern Sacramento Valley, however there is a project for a wildlife refuge in Glenn County and another in Redding. #

Chinook salmon returned to the Klamath River by the thousands this past fall in contrast to the sharp decline in chinook found in the Sacramento River and its tributaries.

The Klamath River count will likely lead to fewer restrictions on local salmon fishermen this year, said biologist Marc Heisdorf, who monitors the salmon population for the California Department of Fish and Game.

Heisdorf said Monday that he doesn't expect this year's Klamath River salmon fishing restrictions to be as severe as last year due because of the high count. Salmon season opens next month for sport fishermen and in May for commercial boats.

As many as 65,000 chinook returned to the Klamath River during the fall run, nearly double the minimum required by state and federal fisheries regulators who monitor the declining population.

Hundreds of commercial salmon fishermen from Eureka to Morro Bay were stuck in port last season because of three consecutive years of declining numbers of chinook in the river.

The federal Pacific Fishery Management Council will discuss this year's restrictions Friday in Sacramento and season guidelines are scheduled to be approved April 6.

The Pacific Fishery Management Council said the Sacramento River area salmon count was about half the previous season run, the lowest numbers since 1992. In the Sacramento River, there were an estimated 435,000 chinook. #

Oroville Mercury Register – 2/27/07
By Laura Ursent, staff writer

Concerned about the passage of fish through the Iron Canyon ladder, Bidwell Park and Playground Commission members talked Monday about the possibilities of mending the ladder, but one commissioner wasn't sure the benefit would be worth it.

Commissioner Jim Walker questioned the worth of the project in Big Chico Creek, pointing out the potential damage the process might have on upper Bidwell Park.

Members of U.S. Fish and Wildlife and a consulting firm told the commission that repairing the 49-year-old fish ladder in upper Bidwell Park is a priority because of the value of the fish in the creek, including spring-run salmon.

Commissioners responded to an updated plan that would repair the ladder — a series of concrete tiered pools that allow the fish to make their way up the boulder-filled creek.

They took no action, but are awaiting the environmental studies being done on the project.

Walker suggested that the damage from the equipment needed to do the work including a crane and concrete trucks, plus the work itself might outweigh the benefit to fish.

A staging place to store the equipment and work in and around the canyon and its lip could be extremely harmful to the park, Walker suggested.

A consultant suggested that the project would be less damaging than earlier predicted, in that only one rock section might have to be removed from the canyon wall, rather than several previously mentioned.

Sam Plank from HDR Engineering said it was likely that dynamiting would not have to occur in the stream bed.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife ordered a study to find if the ladder was repaired, would it be in jeopardy if boulders from the canyon's sides fell into the creek. The study determined the repairs could be done, but that certain rock sections that looked likely to fall should be taken out.

The Sacramento-area consultants from HDR Engineering and Sanders & Associates Geostructural Engineering felt the creek's boulders were locked into their current positions, even with heavy winter rains that have moved them in the past.

Repairing the ladder would cost from $1.5 million to $1.75 million, Plank suggested.

Other government agencies including California Department of Fish and Game and California Department of Water Resources, in addition to the city and Big Chico Creek Watershed Alliance are supportive of the project.

Fish and Wildlife representative John Icanberry said there was no money for implementing the project yet, but said he hoped it would be done during the summer of 2008. #

Redding Record-Searchlight – 2/19/07
By Dylan Darling, staff writer

MCCLOUD RIVER -- The nation's largest water district is now in the private fly-fishing club business.

But Westlands Water District's $35 million purchase of the Bollibokka Fishing Club and almost 3,000 acres of pristine wilderness along a seven-mile stretch of the McCloud River just north of Lake Shasta has nothing to do with rods and reels and everything to do with crops in the San Joaquin Valley and raising Shasta Dam.

"We did not want to see the use of this land to be changed to impede the potential of raising the dam," said Tom Birmingham, general manager for Westlands, a Fresno-based district that counts more than 700 farms as members and covers more than 600,000 acres in western Fresno and Kings counties.

The Bureau of Reclamation has been studying the possibility of raising the dam since 1980 and expects to have a feasibility report complete next year that will detail whether the dam, and Lake Shasta, will be going up.

Ahead of the wave
While the bureau is looking at possibly raising the dam 6½ feet to 18½ feet, the dam's base could support a raise of up to 200 feet. Tourists often hear that when they visit the dam, which was built between 1938 and 1945. The original plans called for an 800-foot dam, but the lack of supplies and labor cut it to 602 feet.

Boosting the dam by 18½ feet would raise Lake Shasta, turning more of McCloud River into reservoir. The new shoreline would extend about 3,500 feet, or two-thirds of a mile, upriver.

Birmingham said Westlands bought the extra 6-1/3 miles of McCloud shoreline to make room for a potential dam raise of more than 18½ feet, perhaps as much as 200 feet.

A 200-foot raise would flood much of the land and it could be a long way off, but Westlands is now ready if the call to add to the dam is made.

"I'm confident it will take years, if not decades, before a decision is done to raise the dam," Birmingham said.

As the state's population, and its thirst for water for agriculture, cities and environmental preserves, continues to grow, the search is on for more water storage, Birmingham said. Lake Shasta often tops the list of potential projects because of the vast amount of water that boosting the dam could bring. Along with added water storage, the increased lake would provide more flood control, cold water for salmon and hydropower production.

A 6½-foot raise would increase storage space in Lake Shasta by 290,000 acre-feet, enough water to supply about 1.1 million people for a year. An 18½-foot increase would boost storage by 636,000 acre-feet, enough for about 2.5 million people for a year. A 200-foot raise would increase storage by 14 million acre-feet, quadrupling the current capacity. The increase could provide a year's water for an additional 56 million people.

Westlands favors raising the dam because it would be one of the most cost-effective ways to increase water supply for the state.

The Bureau of Reclamation estimates the cost of raising the dam 200 feet at $6 billion -- a price that, at least for now, rules out that possibility, said Donna Garcia, who is heading the bureau's study of Shasta Dam.

Added costs
The costs of raising a dam aren't just financial. The higher waters would wash away a long-sheltered trout fishery and American Indian cultural sites along the McCloud River, say opponents to Westlands' purchase of the land and the idea of raising the dam.

"Raising Shasta Dam is not a way to solve California's water supply problems," said Jack Trout, a fly-fishing guide who says the stretch of McCloud now owned by Westlands is one of his favorite places in the world to drop his line in the water.

He said the focus should be pulling salt out of seawater to make drinking water and other alternatives to making reservoirs.

"I don't want to see them take another inch of river," he said.

He's talking especially about the McCloud, and the stretch that has been home to the Bollibokka Fishing Club since it was founded in 1904 by members of the Hills family of San Francisco. That's the same family that founded the Hills Bros. Coffee dynasty.

The club has 33 members and a rustic lodge, stone-walled house and cabin, said Leighton Hills, an heir of the Hills family who ran the club before it was sold.

Fishing season runs from the end of April until mid-November. The Hills put the club and the surrounding land up for sale in September with an asking price of $30 million. More than 20 people, including "movie-star types" and entrepreneurs were interested in the property, with many submitting offers, he said.

Westlands was the high bidder, going $5 million over the asking price and paying more than $11,000 per acre.

"They seemed to want it most," Leighton Hills said.

Trout is angry about the deal, which closed Jan. 12, and his anger simmers on his blog, where he calls Hills a "coward," "creep," "liar" and "dark soul."

"He really sold us out," Trout said.

Members of the Winnemem Wintu, a tribe not recognized by the federal government, said Hills also failed to take into account their cultural sites on the land and along the river. Bollibokka is Wintu for "black manzanita," a bush that grows in abundance along the McCloud.

The 3,000 acres are home to 26 sites that are sacred to the Winnemem Wintu, said Caleen Sisk-Franco, chief and spiritual leader of the 130-member tribe. She said the tribe wants recognition from the federal government, not for the attendant financial gains, but so it can better protect the sites and prevent the dam from being raised.

"We don't want the American dream. We don't want casinos," Sisk-Franco said. "We want our prayer rocks."

In 2004, the tribe held a ceremonial war dance -- their first since 1887 -- to protest the federal government's consideration of raising the dam. The dance was held at the dam.

While he said he doesn't know if there are any cultural sites on the property, Birmingham said he is aware of Wintu ceremonies taking place there and that the ceremonies will be allowed to continue.

But Sisk-Franco said it will be hard to perform the ceremonies if the river rocks that are crucial to them are under water.

Still fishing
For now, fishing will continue at Bollibokka. The club's caretaker, who lives there year-round, now works for Westlands and will continue the upkeep of the club. Any raise of Shasta Dam, and Lake Shasta, is still on the drawing board.

And while Birmingham said Westlands bought the 3,000 acres to preserve the status quo, the consequences brought by the ownership change are still being gauged by those who want keep the McCloud free-flowing along the seven-mile stretch north of Lake Shasta's McCloud arm.

"We are looking at how you fight the Darth Vader of rivers," Sisk-Franco said. #

News Release, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation – 2/6/07
Contacts: Jeffery McCracken, 916-978-5100

In a major step toward recovering endangered fish in the Klamath Basin, Interior's Bureau of Reclamation has awarded a nearly $9 million contract to remove Chiloquin Dam, which would open 80 miles of spawning habitat on the Sprague River in southern Oregon.

"In cooperation with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), Reclamation awarded the contact to the Slayden Construction Group of Stayton, Oregon, on February 5, 2007," said Kirk Rodgers, Regional Director of Reclamation's Mid-Pacific Region. "The removal of Chiloquin Dam and construction of a new pumping plant for delivery of irrigation water represents another major milestone in President Bush's commitment to Klamath Basin restoration."

"Restoring access to this habitat on a tributary above Upper Klamath Lake will enable the endangered Lost River and shortnose suckers to migrate upstream to historical spawning areas in the Sprague River watershed," said Steve Thompson, Manager of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's California/Nevada Operations Office. "This is a significant step in helping to restore the traditional fishery for the Klamath Indian Tribes, which have reserved fishing rights in the area."

Chiloquin Dam, 220 feet wide and 11 feet high, is located on the Sprague River about 30 miles north of Klamath Falls, Oregon. The dam was built by the U.S. Indian Service in 1914 to divert water for use by the Modoc Point Unit of the Klamath Indian Reservation. Ownership of the dam was transferred to the Modoc Point Irrigation District in 1973. The project will also construct a new pumping plant on the Williamson River to provide an alternate means to deliver irrigation water to the Modoc Point Irrigation District.

In June 2005, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a Biological Opinion supporting the Bureau of Indian Affairs' proposal to remove the dam. In September 2005, the BIA completed an Environmental Assessment which analyzed the environmental impacts of the various alternatives.

The Bureau of Indian Affairs' proposed construction schedule will be carried out over 2 years. During the first phase, the new pumping plant will be constructed from July to December 2007. During the second phase, the dam will be removed from July 2008 to December 2008.

The contractor is expected to start on-site mobilization in May 2007. Under an agreement, Reclamation will serve as the contracting entity and provide construction management services to the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

San Francisco Chronicle – 2/6/07

FOR YEARS, Indian tribes, conservationists and fishing groups have argued that removing four power dams blocking the headwaters of the Klamath River would reverse the losses of once-plentiful salmon.

Free flows of cold water are what the fish need, and the fearsome foursome of dams near the Oregon border were major impediments.

Now the federal bureaucracy has joined the chorus in a roundabout way. As a result, taking down the barriers has never been closer.

Because the dams need new licenses to operate, federal agencies have taken a long look. The results aren't pretty for the dam operator, PacificCorp, owned by billionaire philanthropist Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Corp.

To keep the dams humming, Commerce and Interior agencies now want $300 million in fish ladders and screens. This price tag may be too high for PacificCorp, which cranks out only enough power to light 70,000 homes.

A miracle lies within reach. One of the country's biggest dam removal projects could begin, affording a chance at returning surging waters not seen for almost a century. Easing this change is the fact that Washington controls most of the land along the river course, and no major city lies downstream. Taking out other dams on big rivers won't be this easy.

Much remains to complete the dam demolition dream. Sediment behind the dam walls must be considered. Other tolls on the Klamath's health such as timber cuts, farm diversions and human building should be weighed.

But an amazing change is suddenly attainable. The dams that have plagued a once-mighty salmon river may come down. A river's past could be restored. #

Eureka Times-Standard – 2/1/07
By John Driscoll, staff writer

FORTUNA -- A large portion of salmon in the Klamath River continue to become infected by pathogens and die each year, especially when the water is warm and they crowd into cool spots for relief.

Biologists gathered on Wednesday to give a prognosis on the health of the river's fish, and there was not much positive information. Scientists are trying to understand the complicated relationship between conditions in the river, a worm-like host that harbors two key pathogens and how fish handle infection and disease.

Studies show that the polychaete worm that is an intermediate host to the pathogens is most heavily infected below Iron Gate Dam, the lowest on the river. It's also prevalent far above all of the dams, in the Williamson River.

High numbers of parasite spores are released when adult spawning salmon die, and the most spawners are seen just below Iron Gate Dam, said Jerry Bartholomew, a researcher for Oregon State University.

The annual conference has drawn more people as attention on the Klamath has intensified. Commercial fishing was shut down last year and sport and tribal fishing slashed to protect a weak run of fish, causing tens of millions in economic losses along a long stretch of the West Coast.

As water temperature in the river increases, one parasite begins to replicate quickly, and fish infected by it die more rapidly. The incidence of infection in young salmon jumped quickly on May 1, 2006, one month later that a similar spike on April 1, 2005, according to a presentation by Ken Nichols with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Nichols said it almost looks as if there were a trigger responsible for the sharp jump in infection at those times, but it had not yet been identified.

Scott Foott, a pathologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said that the Klamath's native fish have evolved with the pathogens, but get overwhelmed when conditions are stressful. They crowd together in cool spots when water gets warm and that allows infection to spread rapidly, he said.

”It's kind of a death of a thousand cuts,” Foott said.

Fisheries biologist Pat Higgins asked if high pH and ammonia levels observed below Iron Gate Dam would suppress the immune response of salmon. Foott said any additional stress would probably make the fish more susceptible.

Rebecca Quinones with the U.S. Forest Service reported that hatchery bred fish are more and more often spawning in the river -- making up 13 percent of the chinook salmon that return to the Klamath. That percentage is as high as 40 percent in the Shasta River.

Quinones also said that 2006 was another bleak year for spring run salmon, which almost exclusively return to a single tributary of the Klamath -- the Salmon River -- not including the Trinity River. The number of adult steelhead that return to Iron Gate Hatchery is also decreasing, she said. #

Eureka Times-Standard – 1/31/07
By John Driscoll, staff writer

Federal fisheries and wildlife agencies stuck to their guns in a final demand to require Klamath River hydropower dam owner Pacificorp to install ladders for salmon and other fish if it wants a renewed license to operate.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service's stance on providing ways for fish to get above the dams to spawning grounds that have been cut off for decades changed little since its draft report last year. The agencies also issued a scalding indictment of Pacificorp's proposal to trap fish and truck them above and below the dams instead.

Advocates for removing the four dams in question believe the order may grease the skids toward a settlement with Pacificorp that would involve tearing the dams out. It would be the largest dam removal project in the country.

Installing the ladders and other infrastructure needed to allow salmon, steelhead and lamprey to move freely up and downstream may cost $300 million. Those costs could be passed onto Pacificorp's ratepayers, although the California Energy Commission and the U.S. Department of Interior, conservation groups and American Indian tribes hold that taking out the dams and replacing the 151 megawatts by building modern power plants would be a much better deal.

”My interpretation is this should convince Pacificorp that they have lost this battle, and they need to think about their ratepayers and what's best for them,” said Steve Rothert with the group American Rivers, a party to ongoing settlement talks.

Salmon stocks in the Klamath have suffered in recent years and led to severe cutbacks in commercial fishing. Water quality problems have become worse, and diseases among fish are widespread. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is now considering issuing another 30- to 50-year license for the operation.

The report issued Tuesday says that building fish ladders will better protect several species of fish than Pacificorp's proposal, which was modified in December. That included some fishways to be built on some dams, while trapping adult fish to release them both above and between the dams to take advantage of habitat that's been cut off.

”In short, we found that Pacificorp's alternative was substantially less protective of public trust resources,” said Steve Edmondson with the National Marine Fisheries Service.

Among the concerns is that Pacificorp's proposal only deals with fall run chinook salmon, not the other species. Edmondson said that the company's plan and didn't offer the certainty the agencies wanted.

The problems the agencies outlined included the likelihood of harming fish by handling them, making existing disease problems worse, and failing to protect red band trout that live between the dams.

Pacificorp spokesman Dave Kvamme said that the company believes ladders won't work on dams like lowermost Iron Gate Dam, which he said the agencies ignored. But he wouldn't say that Pacificorp intends to challenge the demands in court, but would rather wait until the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission comes out with an environmental impact statement on the project.

Kvamme said the prescriptions imposed by the agencies has not dampened enthusiasm for a settlement among the stakeholders in the Klamath basin.

”Settlement is still a viable option as far as we're concerned,” Kvamme said. #

Mt. Shasta News – 1/24/07
By Paul Boerger, staff writer

In a lengthy comment delivered through its attorneys, the nonprofit group California Trout claims the draft Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Nestle water bottling plant fails to comply with provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act.

CalTrout is calling on Siskiyou County to prepare and recirculate a supplemental draft EIR for further public review and comment. They also call on the Forest Service to conduct a full Environmental Impact Statement on the project as opposed to the less detailed Environmental Assessment previously performed.

The recent CalTrout comment was delivered through attorneys Shute, Mihaly and Weinberger to both the Siskiyou County Department of Planning and the Forest Service. It claims the Forest Service's failure to prepare an EIS of the project violated the federal National Environmental Protection Act.

“We're hoping to avoid the courts. Absolutely,” said CalTrout's Mount Shasta area manager Curtis Knight. “That's the last thing we want to do. There is a solution and litigation isn't it. CEQA clearly lays out the process and in this case it wasn't done adequately. The solution is to collect the necessary baseline information and recirculate the EIR.”

Nestle project manager Dave Palais said he has received the document, but will wait for the county evaluation before commenting. “We will let the planning department review the comment,” Palais said.

California Trout is a non-profit organization with a stated mission to “Protect and restore wild trout and steelhead and their waters throughout California.”

Nestle's proposal to build a water bottling plant in McCloud and its contract with the McCloud Community Services District has stirred considerable controversy as to how the plant may impact water and traffic. Opponents claim the district will not receive a fair share of the revenue, that the environmental reviews to date are inadequate, the amount of water Nestle will draw from the springs are potentially damaging to the McCloud River, and that truck traffic to transport the water will be disruptive and dangerous, especially on Highway 89.

Proponents say the plant will take a small amount of water from the spring, 1,600 acre feet of out an estimated total capacity of 16,000 acre feet, while the jobs generated by the plant will be a boost to an economically depressed area, and the District will benefit from the contract revenue and other Nestle financial commitments to the city.

The draft EIR comment period has been completed and is now under review by the county with public hearings to follow this spring. A recent 3rd District Court of Appeals decision, based on an appeal by Nestle, reinstated the contract between Nestle and the MCSD to build the plant. The contract had been declared null and void by Siskiyou County Superior Court in 2005.

CalTrout's comment states, “Our clients are deeply concerned about the far-ranging environmental impacts the Project may have on the vitality of the McCloud River watershed.”

Among the comment's contentions are that the draft EIR violates CEQA because it fails to adequately describe the Project, fails to analyze the significant environmental impacts of the Project and propose adequate mitigation measures to address those impacts, and fails to undertake a legally sufficient study of alternatives to the Project.

The comment also claims NEPA was violated by “artificially limiting the scope of environmental review under the responsibility of the Forest Service to only a segment of the Project.”

CalTrout cites numerous court cases in support of its positions. Among the contentions in the comment are:
- The draft EIR project description does not permit meaningful public review of the project including amount of water taken, use of spring water, use of well water and water from Lakin Dam;

- The draft EIR fails to provide basic information on the required permits including complete and accurate descriptions of the project;

- The draft EIR does not adequately disclose or analyze the significant environmental impacts including hydrology, aquatic and riparian resources, and impacts on sensitive species;

- The draft EIR fails to adequately analyze traffic impacts including use of trucks to haul the water during snow and ice conditions, impacts from construction vehicles and equipment, and fee based mitigation measures;

- The draft EIR fails to adequately analyze air quality impacts including construction related NOx emissions and diesel fuel emissions;

- The draft EIR fails to adequately analyze noise impacts including construction noise, bottling plant noise and truck traffic noise; and

- The Forest Service failed to prepare an EIS for the project by limiting the scope of its review to not include cumulative impacts and to the pipelines.

In reinstating the contract the 3rd District Court of Appeals appears to have answered some of the CalTrout objections to the draft EIR in saying that although portions of the project are not detailed many “ifs” still remain to be resolved before the plant is completed.

The Court's opinion states, “We conclude, however, the District's approval of the agreement at the conclusion of the public hearing and the execution of the agreement with Nestle did not constitute ‘approval' of a project within the meaning of CEQA. The agreement, while admittedly a binding contract, is conditional and does not grant Nestle a vested right of use of the project.

The agreement is predicated on a series of ifs and commits the District to sell water to Nestle under the described terms only if the described terms are successfully completed.”

The Court's opinion went on the describe the “ifs” as follows:
- If Nestle determines during the contingency period water bottling from the District's springs is feasible and desirable;

- If Nestle selects a site for and designs a bottling facility and obtains all applicable government approvals and permits for the site and facility;

- If the District approves a design for water testing, monitoring, collection and distribution, including written approval of a new collection system, delivery system, and as yet unspecified necessary ancillary facilities;

- If the District and Nestle are able to develop a water supply contingency plan to address foreseeable emergencies; and

- If the District and Nestle are able to jointly develop a road use plan.

“The biggest ‘if' in the agreement however,” according to the Court opinion, “is if all discretionary permits, expressly defined as including CEQA documentation, review and approvals, along with the final adjudication of any legal challenges based on CEQA, are secured and all environmental, title, physical, water quality and economic aspects of the project are assessed.

Contrary to the trial court's interpretation of this agreement as placing the District on the verge of divesting itself of any modicum of control over the compliance process, the terms of the agreement demonstrate the District retains the right to participate in and approve or disapprove of or modify major aspects of the prospective project.” #

Eureka Times-Standard – 1/11/06
By John Driscoll, staff writer

As part of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's proposals outlined in his State of the State address Tuesday are millions or even tens of millions meant to go toward the Klamath River, possibly to grease the skids of removing four of the river's dams.

Some $250 million is proposed for restoration activities on the Klamath and San Joaquin rivers and the Salton Sea. How the money would be split and exactly how it would be used will be determined as part of discussions between the governor's office and the state Legislature.

”The conversation is ongoing as we speak,” said California Resources Agency spokesman Sandy Cooney.

The money would come through bond measures that would go before voters in 2008, Cooney said. It also follows millions of dollars that could go toward Klamath efforts, approved as part of bond measures passed in November.

Significant political pressure is coming to bear to revive the Klamath in recent years, as water shortages and fish kills have cropped up. This past year, commercial salmon fishing was all but halted along a long stretch of the West Coast to protect low salmon returns to the river.

The proposal comes as Pacificorp's dams are being considered for a new 30- to 50-year license. The utility's dams block salmon from 300 miles of spawning habitat above lowermost Iron Gate Dam, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service have signaled that they are unlikely to change demands for fish ladders to be installed. The final provisions are due at the end of the month.

If Pacificorp does have to install fish ladders, it could cost $150 million or more. The costs of capital improvements to hydropower projects can be passed on to ratepayers, with the utility also realizing a reasonable rate of return.

A recent study by the California Energy Commission and the U.S. Department of the Interior found that tearing out the Klamath's dams and building efficient power plants to replace the 150 megawatts they produce would be cheaper for ratepayers than leaving them in. The public utilities commissions in the state's Pacificorp operates in have to approve changes that would affect ratepayers.

Craig Tucker, a spokesman for the Karuk Tribe, said he was pleased that Schwarzenegger continues to show a resolve to fix the problems on the Klamath River.

”He is committed to the Klamath River as indicated by this state of the state speech material,” Tucker said. “The state's been a really good partner.” #

Whole Systems Approach Protects Environment by Conserving Resources and Reducing Waste
News Release, Sacramento Stormwater Quality Partnership – 1/7/07

Sacramento, Calif – As stewards of Sacramento area waterways, the Sacramento Stormwater Quality Partnership* is releasing the River Friendly Landscape Guidelines, a publication and accompanying brochure to encourage landscape professionals and residents to implement a River-Friendly landscape approach, at noon on January 10, 2006, on the third floor lobby of the Sacramento Convention Center (during the Sacramento Valley Landscape and Nursery Expo) located at 1400 J Street.

Considered a more comprehensive and cost effective landscape design and maintenance technique, River-Friendly landscaping safeguards the environment by encouraging residents and landscape professionals to adopt methods based on natural systems.

“River-Friendly landscaping is a holistic approach that goes beyond water-efficient landscaping,” says Dave Tamayo, environmental specialist for Sacramento County. “During landscape design, construction and maintenance, River-Friendly landscape methods work in tandem with nature which, in the end, reduces reliance on pesticides and fertilizers, conserves water and energy and significantly reduces green waste to landfills.”

A successful practice used in Alameda County, River-Friendly landscaping balances the use of plants that are well adapted to local climate and soil conditions with simple environmentally-friendly maintenance practices that include:

¦ - Using local plant communities.

¦ - Reducing green waste to local landfills through appropriate plant selections and “grasscycling.”

¦ - Promoting the use of compost which helps conserve and filter water and adds nutrients to soil.

¦ - Conserving energy and fuel resources by reducing the need for gas powered equipment, hiring local landscapers utilizing hand-powered tools and planting trees for shade.

¦ - Protecting water and air quality through an integrated pest management approach.

¦ - Considering plant selections that provide habitat for wildlife and other beneficial organisms.

“River-Friendly landscapes are not alike – it’s a concept that takes into consideration key principles that will help the environment,” said Tamayo. “It has many intrinsic environmental benefits, but also offers a number of choices for creating an array of landscapes – from a Mediterranean retreat to an edible garden with fruit trees.”

For a comprehensive list of local River-Friendly landscaping and gardening resources, visit www.sacramentostormwater.org/SSQP/Riverfriendly.

Eureka Times-Standard – 1/5/06

WASHINGTON -- On the first day of the 110th Congress, bills were introduced in both the House and Senate to aid suffering salmon fishermen.

North Coast Congressman Mike Thompson, D-St. Helena, introduced legislation to provide federal disaster relief to California and Oregon's salmon fishing industry.

The bill authorizes the appropriation of $60.4 million for the fishermen, tribes and businesses that were impacted by the commercial fishery failure of 2006.

California Sen. Barbara Boxer also introduced companion legislation Thursday in the Senate.

Reps. Lois Capps, Anna Eshoo, Sam Farr, Peter DeFazio, Darlene Hooley, George Miller, Doris Matsui, Tom Lantos, Zoe Lofgren, Lynn Woolsey and David Wu co-authored Thompson's legislation. Boxer's legislation is co-authored by Oregon Sens. Gordon Smith and Ron Wyden.

”It is our responsibility to do everything we can to help the thousands of families and businesses that are suffering from the largest commercial salmon fishery disaster in our nation's history,” said Thompson. “The devastating impact this disaster has had on California's North Coast has been obvious for years, and it is time we help bring this important industry back to life.”

Boxer said: “Our coastal communities have already waited too long to get the disaster relief they need as a result of this administration's mismanagement of the Klamath River. By introducing this legislation on the first day of Congress, we are letting our communities and families know that getting them financial assistance is a top priority this year.”

According to Thompson's office, the fisheries disaster was due in large part to poor federal management of the Klamath River, which caused 80,000 adult salmon to die in 2002. Since then, the salmon population has continued to deteriorate, forcing the Pacific Fisheries Management Council to sizably reduce the fishing seasons in 2005 and 2006. As a result, the commercial fishing season was cut by more than 90 percent in 2006, costing fishing families and associated fishing businesses more than $60 million.

There is also an expectation that the commercial salmon season will be significantly reduced in 2007, as well.

”Getting our fisherman and salmon businesses back on their feet is a top priority for me and my colleagues from California and Oregon,” said Thompson. “But it is also important that we stay focused on restoring the salmon population in the Klamath basin so this disaster does not continue into the future. As a first step toward that goal, we passed legislation last Congress requiring the government to implement a salmon restoration plan, and I look forward to monitoring the government's progress.” #

Ukiah Daily Journal – 1/5/07
By Ben Brown, staff writer

A significant number of the steelhead in two forks of Mud Springs Creek near Laytonville have been killed by sediment in the waterway from erosion related to nearby land development, according to National Oceanographic Atmospheric Administration recovery coordinator Charlotte Ambrose.

Sediment killed 20 percent of the steelhead in the south fork of Mud Springs Creek and 40 percent of the fish in the north fork of Mud Springs Creek, Ambrose said Thursday. The sediment came from a nearby hill where owner Stuart Bewley was converting 130 acres of forestland into vineyards.

However, the conversion involved cutting down several stands of mature redwood and Douglas fir trees, permanently removing the roots, creating roads and drainage and performing extensive land grading, which caused erosion.

In 2002, officials from the NOAA Fisheries Service and Office for Law Enforcement were notified by the California North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board of large amounts of soil in several streams. The soil was traced to Bewley's property.

Bewley was converting his land in accordance with a California Timber Harvest Plan and a conversion permit. Ambrose said state laws are not always adequate to protect the forest. "This is a case that demonstrates how," Ambrose said.

Sediment is not always harmful to steelhead, Ambrose said. In many places it is essential to form nests where steelhead eggs are laid. But too much sediment can be harmful and even fatal to the fish. Sediment can clog the areas where steelhead lay their eggs and where young steelhead take refuge, Ambrose said.

Fine sediment can abrade the gills and other soft tissue on the fish, impairing feeding and respiration. In worst case scenarios, sediment can completely fill a stream, driving it underground. "Sediment can affect fish at any age," Ambrose said.

A fine of $10,000 has been levied against Bewley. It was originally $105,600 but was reduced when it was found that Bewley was already taking steps to correct the damage and had invested $870,000 of his own money to address the erosion problems."He allowed us on his property," Ambrose said. "He was very cooperative."

The steelhead in this area have been listed as threatened by NOAA fisheries under the Endangered Species Act, indicating they are likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future, according to an NOAA report. #

Fresno Bee – 1/3/07

Three weeks after he took office, Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne stopped the worst parts of a proposed overhaul of national parks management policies. Now he needs to do the same with a proposed overhaul of the Bureau of Land Management, which manages three times as much public land as the National Park Service.

The BLM is the steward of many of the great landscapes of the American West. In particular, the lands and waters of the National Landscape Conservation System have been called "hidden treasures of the American West." They include national monuments, national conservation areas, wilderness areas, historic trails and wild and scenic rivers.

A proposed BLM reorganization would dump a variety of unrelated programs into the National Landscape Conservation System, diluting resources that would be devoted to managing the system, which is already strained. Worse, this latest reorganization plan was hatched in secret with no public review and no congressional oversight.

Rep. Mary Bono, R-Palm Springs, and 25 other House members called in a Dec. 20 letter for the BLM to halt the proposed reorganization until Congress examines the implications for the 26 million-acre National Landscape Conservation System.

For much of its history, the BLM managed its public lands under 19th century traditions of logging, grazing, oil and gas drilling and mining. Today the agency has another mission: managing premier conservation lands for their scientific, scenic, recreational, ecological, wildlife, historical and cultural values. Congress should ensure the reorganization is not just a way for the BLM to back away from the conservation mission.

California has a wealth of lands in the BLM conservation system: the Headwaters Forest Reserve; the California Desert National Conservation area; three national monuments; six rivers; four historic trails, including the Pacific Crest Trail; and 76 wilderness areas.

The concerns expressed by Bono and others in Congress are real. Under the Bush administration, funding for the National Landscape Conservation System has been neither stable nor adequate. It was $37.5 million in 2002; $41.5 million in 2003; $40.4 million in 2004; $39 million in 2005; $42 million in 2006. The Bush administration has proposed cutting the budget to $37 million for 2007.

It is up to Kempthorne and Congress to ensure that the BLM remains committed to its mission to "conserve, protect and restore these nationally significant landscapes that have outstanding cultural, ecological and scientific values for the benefit of current and future generations."

Most important, Congress will have to ensure that the proposed reorganization is not simply a pretext for reducing support for the BLM's hard-won conservation mandate. #